Text-Why Suspects Confess

8/4/2019 Text-Why Suspects Confess

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/text-why-suspects-confess 1/6

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type><META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR></HEAD><BODY><XMP>

WHY SUSPECTS CONFESS

By

David D. Tousignant, M.A.Inspector

Lowell, Massachusetts, Police Department

Many criminal cases, even when investigated by the mostexperienced and best qualified investigators, are ultimatelysolved by an admission or confession from the person responsible

for committing the crime. Oftentimes, investigators are able tosecure only a minimal amount of evidence, be it physical orcircumstantial, that points directly to a suspect, and in manyinstances, this evidence is not considered strong enough byprosecutors to obtain a conviction. In such cases, theinterrogation of the suspects and their subsequent confessionsare of prime importance.

This article addresses the question of why suspects speakfreely to investigators, and ultimately, sign full confessions.The physical and psychological aspects of confession and howthey relate to successful interrogations of suspects are alsodiscussed, as is the "breakthrough," the point in the

interrogation when suspects make an admission, no matter howminuscule, that begins the process of obtaining a fullconfession.

DEFINING INTERROGATION

Interrogation is the questioning of a person suspected ofhaving committed a crime. (1) It is designed to match acquiredinformation to a particular suspect in order to secure aconfession. (2) The goals of interrogation include:

* To learn the truth of the crime and how it happened

* To obtain an admission of guilt from the suspect

* To obtain all the facts to determine the method ofoperation and the circumstances of the crime in question

* To gather information that enables investigators to arriveat logical conclusions

* To provide information for use by the prosecutor inpossible court action. (3)

Knowing the definition and objectives of the interrogation,

the question then asked is, "Why do suspects confess?"Self-condemnation and self-destruction are not normal humanbehavioral characteristics. Human beings ordinarily do not



utter unsolicited, spontaneous confessions. (4) It is logicalto conclude, therefore, that when suspects are taken to policestations to be questioned concerning their involvement in aparticular crime, their immediate reaction will be a refusal toanswer any questions. With the deluge of television programsthat present a clear picture of the Miranda warning and itsapplication to suspects, one would conclude that no one

questioned about a crime would surrender incriminatinginformation, much less supply investigators with a signed, fullconfession. It would also seem that once suspects sense thedirection in which the investigators are heading, theconversation would immediately end. However, for variouspsychological reasons, suspects continue to speak withinvestigators.

SUSPECT PARANOIA

Suspects are never quite sure of exactly what informationinvestigators possess. They know that the police are

investigating the crime, and in all likelihood, suspects havefollowed media accounts of their crimes to determine what leadsthe police have. Uppermost in their minds, however, is how toescape detection and obtain firsthand information about theinvestigation and where it is heading.

Such "paranoia" motivates suspects to accompany the policevoluntarily for questioning. Coupled with curiosity, thisparanoia motivates suspects to appear at police headquarters as"concerned citizens" who have information pertinent to the case.By doing this, suspects may attempt to supply false ornoncorroborative information in order to lead investigatorsastray, gain inside information concerning the case from

investigators, and remove suspicion from themselves by offeringinformation on the case so investigators will not suspect theirinvolvement.

For example, in one case, a 22-year-old woman wasdiscovered in a stairwell outside of a public building. Thewoman had been raped and was found naked and bludgeoned.Investigators interviewed numerous people during the nextseveral days but were unable to identify any suspects. Mediacoverage on the case was extremely high.

Several days into the investigation, a 23-year-old manappeared at police headquarters with two infants in tow andinformed investigators that he believed he may have someinformation regarding the woman's death. The man revealed thatwhen he was walking home late one evening, he passed the areawhere the woman was found and observed a "strange individual"lurking near an adjacent phone booth. The man said that becausehe was frightened of the stranger, he ran back to his home.After reading the media accounts of the girl's death, hebelieved that he should tell the police what he had observed.

The man gave police a physical description of the"stranger" and then helped an artist to compose a sketch of theindividual. After he left, investigators discovered that the

sketch bore a strong resemblance to the "witness" who providedthe information.



After further investigation, the witness was asked toreturn to the police station to answer more questions, which hedid gladly. Some 15 hours into the interrogation, he confessedto one of his "multiple personalities" having killed the woman,who was unknown to him, simply because the victim was a woman,which is what the suspect had always wanted to be.

This case clearly illustrates the need for some suspects toknow exactly what is happening in an investigation. In theirminds, they honestly believe that by hiding behind the guise of"trying to help," they will, without incriminating themselves,learn more about the case from the investigators.

INTERROGATION SETTING

In any discussion concerning interrogation, it is necessaryto include a review of the surroundings where a suspect is to beinterrogated. Because there is a general desire to maintainpersonal integrity before family members and peer groups,

suspects should be removed from familiar surroundings and takento a location that has an atmosphere more conducive tocooperativeness and truthfulness. (5) The primary psychologicalfactor contributing to successful interrogations is privacy--being totally alone with suspects. (6) This privacy promptssuspects to feel willing to unload the burden of guilt. (7) Theinterrogation site should isolate the suspect so that only theinterrogator is present. The suspect's thoughts and responsesshould be free from all outside distractions or stimuli.

The interrogation setting also plays an important part inobtaining confessions. The surroundings should reduce suspectfears and contribute to the inclination to discuss the crime.

Because fear is a direct reinforcement for defensive mechanisms(resistance), it is important to erase as many fears aspossible. (8) Therefore, the interrogation room shouldestablish a business atmosphere as opposed to a police-likeatmosphere. While drab, barren interrogation rooms increasefear in suspects, a location that displays an open,you-have-nothing-to fear quality about it can do much to breakdown interrogation defensiveness, thereby eliminating a majorbarrier. (9) The interrogators tend to disarm the suspectspsychologically by placing them in surroundings that are freefrom any fear-inducing distractions.

PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS

More than likely, suspects voluntarily accompanyinvestigators, either in response to a police request to answerquestions or in an attempt to learn information about theinvestigation. Once settled in the interrogation room, theinterrogators should treat suspects in a civilized manner, nomatter how vicious or serious the crime might have been. Whilethey may have feelings of disgust for the suspects, the goal isto obtain a confession, and it is important that personalemotions not be revealed. (10)

Investigators should also adopt a compassionate attitude and

attempt to establish a rapport with suspects. In most cases,suspects commit crimes because they believe that it offers thebest solution to their needs at the moment. (11) Two rules of



thumb to remember are: 1) "There but for the grace of God goI"; and 2) it is important to establish a common level ofunderstanding with the suspects. (12) These rules are criticalto persuading suspects to be open, forthright, and honest.Suspects should be persuaded to look beyond the investigators'badges and see, instead, officers who listen without judging.If investigators are able to convince suspects that the key

issue is not the crime itself, but what motivated them to committhe crime, they will begin to rationalize or explain theirmotivating factors.

At this stage of the interrogation, investigators are onthe brink of having suspects break through remaining defensivebarriers to admit involvement in the crime. This is thecritical stage of the interrogation process known as thebreakthrough.

THE BREAKTHROUGH

The breakthrough is the point in the interrogation whensuspects make an admission, no matter how small. (13) In spite ofhaving been advised of certain protections guaranteed by theConstitution, most suspects feel a need to confess. Bothhardcore criminals and first-time offenders suffer from the samepangs of conscience. (14) This is an indication that their defensemechanisms are diminished, and at this point, the investigatorsmay push through to elicit the remaining elements of confession.

In order for interrogators to pursue a successfulbreakthrough, they must recognize and understand certainbackground factors that are unique to a particular suspect.Many times, criminals exhibit psychological problems that are

the result of having come from homes torn by conflict anddissension. Also frequently found in the backgrounds ofcriminals are parental rejection and inconsistent and severepunishment. (15) It is important that investigators see beyondthe person sitting before them and realize that past experiencescan impact on current behavior. Once interrogators realizethat the fear of possible punishment, coupled with the loss ofpride in having to admit to committing mistakes, is the basicinhibitor they must overcome in suspects, they will quickly beable to formulate questions and analyze responses that willbreak through the inhibitors.

SUCCESSFUL INTERROGATIONS

Investigators must conduct every interrogation with thebelief that suspects, when presented with the proper avenue,will use it to confess their crimes. Research indicates thatmost guilty persons who confess are, from the outset, lookingfor the proper opening during the interrogation to communicatetheir guilt to the interrogators. (16)

Suspects confess when the internal anxiety caused by theirdeception outweighs their perceptions of the crime'sconsequences. (17) In most instances, suspects have magnified,in their minds, both the severity of the crime and the possible

repercussions. Interrogators should allay suspect anxiety byputting these fears into perspective.



Suspects also make admissions or confessions when theybelieve that cooperation is the best course of action. (18) Ifthey are convinced that officers are prepared to listen to allof the circumstances surrounding the crimes, they will begin totalk. The psychological and physiological pressures that buildin a person who has committed a crime are best alleviated bycommunicating. (19) In order to relieve these suppressed

pressures, suspects explain the circumstances of their crimesthey confess.

And, finally, suspects confess when interrogators are ableto speculate correctly on why the crimes were committed.Suspects want to know ahead of time that interrogators willbelieve what they have to say and will understand what motivatedthem to commit the crime.

CONCLUSION

It is natural for suspects to want to preserve their

privacy, civil rights, and liberties. It is also natural forsuspects to resist discussing their criminal acts. For thesevery reasons, however, investigators must develop the skillsthat enable them to disarm defensive resistors established bysuspects during interrogation. Before suspects will confess,they must feel comfortable in their surroundings, and they musthave confidence in the interrogators, who should attempt to gainthis confidence by listening intently to them and by allowingthem to verbalize their accounts of the crimes.

Interrogators who understand what motivates suspects toconfess will be better able to formulate effective questions andanalyze suspect responses. Obviously, more goes into gaining a

confession than is contained in this article. However, if theinterrogator fails to understand the motivations of the suspect,other factors impacting on obtaining the confession will be lesseffective.

FOOTNOTES

(1) Charles E. O'Hara and Gregory L. O'Hara, Fundamentalsof Criminal Investigation, 5th ed. rev. (Springfield, IL:Charles C. Thomas, 1988), p. 117.

(2) W. E. Renoud, Criminal Investigation Digest (Springfield,IL: Charles C. Thomas, 1981), p. 10.

(3) John J. Horgan, Criminal Investigations, 2d ed. (NewYork, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1979), p. 78.

(4) Fred E. Inbau, John E. Reid, and Joseph P. Buckley,Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 3d ed. (Baltimore, MD:Williams & Wilkins, 1986), p. 16.

(5) Robert F. Royal and Steven R. Schutt, The Gentle Artof Interviewing and Interrogation: A Professional Manual andGuide (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976), p. 56.

(6) Supra note 4, p. 24.



(7) Charles R. Swanson, Jr., Neil Chamelin, and LeonardTerrito, Criminal Investigation, 4th ed. (New York, NY: RandomHouse, 1988), p. 210.


(9) Ibid.


(11) Ibid., p. 13.

(12) Ibid., p. 13.

(13) Supra note 5.

(14) Supra note 7.

(15) James C. Coleman, James N. Butcher, and Robert C.

Carson, Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, 7th ed. (Glenview,IL: Scott Foresman and Company, 1984), p. 261.

(16) Supra note 7, p. 209.

(17) John Reid and Associates, The Reid Technique ofInterviewing and Interrogation (Chicago, IL: Reid & Associates,1986), p. 44.

(18) Supra note 5, p. 115.

(19) Supra note 7, p. 209. </XMP></BODY></HTML>

Text-Why Suspects Confess

Documents

Transcript of Text-Why Suspects Confess